While China, India, and other nations are building new coal-fired power plants, the United States, which nearly a quarter of the world's coal reserves, is still following the path laid out by President Obama of phasing out coal production. Canadian analyst Tom Harris, whose home province of Ontario has banned all coal-fired power generation, explains that this stems from the myth that carbon dioxide is as dirty as coal.

Canadians Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition trace the history of the "global warming" scam, which is founded on equating carbon dioxide with carbon to give the public an image of carbon dioxide as "dirty." They cite both Canadian and American politicians and scientists who have advanced this false narrative.

New Zealander Bryan Leyland and Canadian Tom Harris, both of the International Climate Science Coalition, argue that the United States is setting a bad example and harming its own people -- and those in developing nations -- by continuing the EPA's war on coal, nuclear energy, and natural gas. Wind and solar have major problems with reliability, cost, and adverse health and environmental impacts that their proponents gloss over, whereas emissions from modern, highly efficient coal-fired power plants with stack gas cleanup consist almost entirely of water, CO2, and nitrogen.

CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen makes a strong case for full reversal of the EPA's "endangerment finding" it used to attack the coal industry and ultimately all fossil fuel energy -- the EPA lied, falsified documents, and excluded contradictory testimony from the hearings to ensure that fossil fuels did not get a fair trial.

CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen champions a new book, for which he provided one essay, entitles, "Climate Change: The Facts 2017," which covers climate changes through the ages and reveals the devious tricks that alarmist "researchers" have used to modify and "homogenize" actual temperature data to fit their alarmist computer models. Driessen then points out the tremendous human cost of these foolish, people-killing policies that are insisted upon by the radical greens and are sadly being adopted in all too many places.

Eight top scientists responded to complaints by Massachusetts Institute of Technology President Rafael Reif and others condemning President Trump for withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris climate accords, stating strongly that he had done the right thing for America. The authors cite temperature and other climate data that are at odds with the computer modeling upon which the global warming theory is founded -- and show that myriad claims by warmists are either false or misleading. Number one with a bullet is that carbon dioxide is a killer when in fact is is the life-giving catalyst for plant growth.

Aside from protests by Al Gore, Leonardo Di Caprio, and friends, the public didn’t seem to raise its carbon dioxide (CO2) anguish much above the Russians-election frenzy when Trump exited the Paris Climate Accords. Statistician Bjorn Lomborg had already pointed out that the Paris CO2 emission promises would cost one hundred trillion dollars ($100 trillion) that no one has, and make only a 0.05º C difference in Earth’s 2100 AD temperature. Others say perhaps a 0.2º C (0.3º F) difference, and even that would hold only in the highly unlikely event that all parties actually kept their voluntary pledges. What few realize, however, [...]

CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen, with climatologist David Legates, asks those who claim that "we are still in" the Paris climate accord pay their equal share of the U.S. payment mandated by the Paris accords? How also will they justify the loss of jobs, revenues, and even the health of their constituents -- almost all of whom were not consulted when these leaders made their high-sounding pronouncements -- all of whom did so without providing a pathway for making the payments to the UN or the early retirement of fossil fuel power sources and replacement with the massive, very expensive wind and solar and biomass units needed to keep America's electrical grid functional without major interruptions in service? The fact is that none of these blowhards can answer these questions, so they prefer to ignore them, hoping they will not have to do so.

By John Rafuse President Trump’s budget guidance sought to cut $1.6 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency’s $8.1 billion expectation. Shrieks of looming Armageddon prompted Congress to fund the EPA in full until September 2017, when the battle will be joined again. Then EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said he would prioritize Superfund cleanups based on toxicity, health impacts, and other factors. The ensuing caterwauling suggested that the EPA had no priorities since Bill Ruckelshaus (EPA’s first administrator, 1970-1975, at left). But consider some standard EPA practices: 1. EPA advocates claim the U.S. is unhealthy and dirty. They won’t admit [...]

By CFACT|2017-06-22T08:05:35+00:00June 22nd, 2017|Guest Insights|Comments Off on EPA’s suspect science

CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen explains that "(r)ecent science and climate marches demonstrated how misinformed, indoctrinated, politicized and anti-Trump these activists are – and how indifferent about condemning millions in industrialized nations and billions in developing countries to green energy poverty. It’s as if reality, truth, discussion, and debate have become irrelevant where feelings, leftist dogma, climate science, or public policies are involved. On the climate front, at stake are $100 billion a year in reparation funds for poor countries, $7 trillion a year for companies that want to build “sustainable low-carbon” energy systems, and boundless power for politicians and bureaucrats who want to control economic growth, livelihoods and living standards.

The Trump Administration has an opportunity to reverse overreach by the EPA and other federal agencies -- but Congress and even the Courts have a role to play, according to CFACT policy advisor Larry Bell. Indeed. even the simplest actions by the Pruitt-led EPA or the Trump Administation in general will likely be challenged in federal courts by those with vested interests in the status quo.

By Larry Bell|2017-04-10T14:36:56+00:00April 10th, 2017|CFACT Insights|Comments Off on Congress, courts must help Trump drain EPA swamp

CFACT advisor Larry Bell asks the rhetorical question -- Will the climate fanatics tone down their rhetoric given the lack of evidence of climate catastrophe? Indeed, though nearly every single fear-filled prediction of theirs has failed to occur, they will not be shamed into silence as long as the worldwide "science" community enjoys the financial benefits of parroting the party line.

Greg Walcher, a former secretary of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, argues that forests provide the world’s greatest resource for cleaning CO2 out of the atmosphere. Rotting and fires themselves emit greenhouse gases, but atmospheric CO2 makes all plants grow faster and better and with improved tolerance to drought. Thus, it is vital that the U.S. must reverse policies that oppose logging, tree thinning, and other management necessary for healthy forests.